From the Washington Post, August 10:
The budget of the federal government is the largest of any organization in human history. It’s larger than the entire economy of every foreign country except China. And it mostly grows automatically, without regular input from elected officials.
In the past, huge surges in the national debt were largely caused by wars or recessions. They were temporary. When the war concluded or economic growth resumed, debt as a share of the economy would fall.
That’s not how it works anymore. The debt increases due to demographic trends as the bulk of spending goes to programs that serve an aging population. The budget deficit as a share of the economy in 2025, during a peacetime expansion, was larger than any year of the 1930s, the decade of the Great Depression.
Around 2030, the United States is projected to surpass three milestones that illustrate the lack of precedent for the government’s fiscal predicament.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, 2030 is the year when federal debt held by the public as a share of the economy will exceed the record set by World War II. Unlike in the ’40s, this debt shows no signs of ever declining....
....MUCH MORE
During the run-up to the 2024 Presidential election we thought the bondpocalypse was closer in time than 2030:
That statement seems carefully worded, it's obvious she's not running. And it is not exactly General Sherman's "I will not accept if nominated and will not serve if elected."
It's also not another Sherman quote (my fave) regarding his friend and superior officer General Grant:
"Grant stood by me when I was crazy, and I stood by him when he was drunk, and now we stand by each other."
but then again the former First Lady probably wouldn't say something like that regarding President Biden.I wonder though if she would accept her party's nomination at the convention in Chicago.
President Biden would have a whole bunch of delegates he could release if he were to retire from the field.On the other hand, I'm not sure you would want to be President during the next four years, there are so many problems that have been growing and metastasizing just beneath the surface of the daily news that the person in the hot seat could end up just plain reviled....
A couple weeks later in "Hotshot Wharton professor sees $34 trillion debt triggering 2025 meltdown as mortgage rates spike above 7%: ‘It could derail the next administration’" we took the idea a bit further:
This is the sort of stuff I was thinking about in the intro to March 6's "Michelle Obama's office says the former first lady 'will not be running for president' in 2024":
...On the other hand, I'm not sure you would want to be President during the next four years, there are so many problems that have been growing and metastasizing just beneath the surface of the daily news that the person in the hot seat could end up just plain reviled.If I were a Democrat strategist I would propose letting Donald Trump win a second term while concentrating on House and especially Senate (to bottle up judicial, including Supreme Court, nominees) races.
A Trump win would give an excuse for riots (for the visuals) and if he is handcuffed by the Legislative branch to limit the range of possible responses, you go beyond polycrisis to the omnicrisis. Throw in a bit of Frances Fox Piven with her "overwhelm the system" and "motor voter" strategies and you could see one-party rule for thirty years.
There are probably a dozen ways things could come to a head, Joe steps down, Kamala is elevated, appoints Gavin or Michelle as Veep, steps down herself etc.
After Nixon resigned the country ended up with Gerald Ford and Nelson Rockefeller in the top two spots, with neither of them having run for their respective position. So all sorts of possibilities.
Stay tuned!
